cvs commit: src/sys/netgraph netgraph.h ng_base.c ng_source.c src/sys/netgraph/atm/sscop ng_sscop_cust.h src/sys/netgraph/atm/uni ng_uni_cust.h src/sys/netgraph/bluetooth/hci ng_hci_main.c ng_hci_misc.c ng_hci_var.h src/sys/netgraph/bluetooth/l2cap ...

[Gleb Smirnoff]

On Fri, Nov 26, 2004 at 08:24:02AM -0700, Scott Long wrote:
S> One of the stated goals for 5-STABLE was that we would retain API and
S> ABI stability except when absolutely neccessary when fixing bugs or
S> security holes.  I know that we didn't explicitily name netgraph in
S> the list of 'stable' subsystems, but it was assumed to be part of
S> 'networking'.  Can you please explain why this ABI change is required
S> for 5-STABLE?

We are going to test netgraph(4) for mpsafeness soon. Without this change
it is impossible to turn netgraph ISR to MPSAFE. We are not going to enable
MPSAFE netgraph ISR in RELENG_5, but we want to bring RELENG_5 to a state,
when a small a 1-line patch enables MPSAFE ISR. In this case users running
RELENG_5 will have an easy opportunity to test.

I'm afraid that CURRENT userbase does not run netgraph widely, and thus
we will not find resuorces for thourough testing.

I understand all problems caused by API change, but we need this to go on.

P.S. And only a small number of nodes affected.

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE